F3HP Viewfinders vs. Other Nikons

snegron · Sep 13, 2007

copake_ham said:
Here we go!

Roger pops in with an OT post and now we'll wind up debating:

1) RF v. SLR
2) German glass v. Japanese glass
3) Cameras that use batteries v. those that don't
4) Trekking in the Himalayas

etc. etc.

Fasten your seat belts everyone....

In the end it all makes for nail-biting fun though! After all, why sould we be wasting time going out and shooting pictures when instead we can all be in here having such wonderfuly colorful debates?

I say we give the debates a kick start! Here goes:

1. "RF vs. SLR"- I won't go there because I don't own a rangefinder yet, but hopefully sometime soon I will!

2. "German glass vs. Japanese glass." - Everyone knows that Japanese glass is better.

3. "Cameras that use batteries vs. those that don't." - I'm sure we have all learned by know that the quality of a camera is measured by its ability to function without a battery. The less battery dependent, the better the camera. A known fact. Real photographers don't need meters or auto exposure anyway, just accurate mechanical shutter speeds and reliable apertures.

4. "Treking in the Himalayas" - The only camera capable of surviving 24 hours or more in harsh Himalayan conditions is a Nikon F with standard, umetered prism.

And just for fun...

1. "RF vs. SLR"- I still won't go there because I don't own a rangefinder yet, but hopefully sometime soon I will!

2. "German glass vs. Japanese glass." - Everyone knows that German glass is better!

3. "Cameras that use batteries vs. those that don't."- Batteries are the mark of a civilized society. Why bother with all mechanical cameras when even in the jungles of Guam there are stores that sell batteries!

4. "Treking in the Himalayas" - There is no fun in photographing snow anyway, so why bother?

Sparky · Sep 13, 2007

Roger Hicks said:
Eh? A camera with no flaws? Even my MP isn't perfect, but I'd much rather use it than an F3.

well... thank god there's subjectivity right? to each their own heaven... there wasn't a single thing I needed the F3 to do that it didn't already do - and do very well... (needed a camera that would take a 28mm shift lens, or a 55 micro nikkor - that could do multiple exposures without error - and that had an accurate viewfinder that I could remove... beat that!)

but - I guess I was never bothered (nor do I even remember) the LCD panel - since I NEVER ever used in-camera metering.

dslater · Sep 13, 2007

Roger Hicks said:
Eh? A camera with no flaws? Even my MP isn't perfect, but I'd much rather use it than an F3.

Hmm - unless you're taking a 1:1 or 2:1 macro photo, or trying to shoot that bird with a wide open 300mm lens. Choose the right too for the job.

Mick Fagan · Sep 13, 2007

Probably the LCD could have been manufactured better. My first F3HP LCD is having problems and is starting to falter. In super bright sunlight, it is now a bit fiddly to get a perfect reading as some of the characters break up.

If I consider how this camera body has been treated then it is fantastic that anything works. The fact that the LCD is at last starting to fail isn't a problem to me. I cannot remember the amount of times the LCD screen went completely black in extreme heat, but go black it does. It also doesn't work around -30C either, neither does the operator

The F3HP finder is really required if you ever get to use the 15mm rectilinear lens. With this super wide coverage lens it is imperative you see exactly what is available, otherwise you end up guessing wildly.

I have had this lens on my F3HP and FE2 alongside each other for testing purposes, to see if we could use the smaller FE2 body for rock climbing photography. The FE2 viewfinder was woefully inadequate compared to the F3HP viewfinder, the larger body was used.

Mick.

dslater · Sep 13, 2007

Mick Fagan said:
Probably the LCD could have been manufactured better.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that the F3 used some of the first generation LCD's. At the time, there probably wasn't anything better.

Mick Fagan · Sep 13, 2007

Yes it was touted as the first usage of an LCD in a camera, as far as I can remember.

Mick.

roteague · Sep 13, 2007

Sparky said:
For my money - the F3HP HAD no flaws. I had no problems or issues with mine at any time. I loved it - and it was, by a LONG shot, the best 35mm I'd ever used. If only people actually USED their cameras more, and stopped just sittin' on their duffs looking at them...! (that wasn't a personal jab - just in case it be taken that way)

I had an F3 once, a early one. In terms of reliability, it was the worse camera I ever owned. I went through system board after system board. I eventually replaced it with an N70.

snegron · Sep 13, 2007

roteague said:
I had an F3 once, a early one. In terms of reliability, it was the worse camera I ever owned. I went through system board after system board. I eventually replaced it with an N70.

Interesting point. I have heard of this type of problem from a few F3 owners. I wonder if it was a certain production lot that had deffective circuit boards? I would be curious to know if this could be determined by the serial numbers.

Sparky · Sep 13, 2007

roteague said:
I had an F3 once, a early one. In terms of reliability, it was the worse camera I ever owned. I went through system board after system board. I eventually replaced it with an N70.

sorry you had the experience robert - some people just get the bad luck at times...! been there before...!

ehparis · Sep 14, 2007

copake_ham said:
Snegron,

From the Nikon Compendium:

"For those photographers who wear glasses seeing into the extreme corners of the image area in the viewfinder is often a problem since they cannot position their eye close enough to the eyepiece. Normal viewfinders are designed for an eye relief distance of about 15mm between the eyepiece and eye. As this distance increases the corners of the finder image begin to be obscured. In order to solve this problem Nikon developed a special viewfinder for the F3, the High-eyepoint (HP) finder, which has an eye relief distance of 25mm allowing a complete view of the finder image that suffices for most glass wearers.

"The HP viewfinder, known as the DE-3, turns a normal F3 into an F3 HP increasing the camera's weight from 700 to 745 grams. It is not just those with glasses who have come to apperciate the F3 HP, photographers with normal vision can benefit from the more comfortable viewing afforded by this finder, so much so that in the latter years of its production the F3 was invariably delivered as the HP version."

Perhaps they accomplished the effect with a bit of wide-angling?

I wear glasses. My F3HP clearly gives me a larger field of view than my F or F2 cameras. I think George's quotation explains this. Even without glasses you're likely to see more of the 100% display. The F (eye level and FTn) and F2A also have 100% displays but I simply can't get my eye close enough wearing glasses. The F3HP gives me an edge.

That said, the field of view, wider or bigger, doesn't mean I don't shoot my F and F2 cameras.

roteague · Sep 14, 2007

snegron said:
Interesting point. I have heard of this type of problem from a few F3 owners. I wonder if it was a certain production lot that had deffective circuit boards? I would be curious to know if this could be determined by the serial numbers.

It is always possible. I had an early unit, but I don't know where the camera is (to be able to find out) - it is probably in a box somewhere.

donbga · Sep 14, 2007

roteague said:
Keep in mind that professional level Nikons (F2 to F6) all show 100% of the image in the viewfinder.

Nikon F to F6 display 100% of the image in the viewfinder.

roteague · Sep 14, 2007

donbga said:
Nikon F to F6 display 100% of the image in the viewfinder.

I forgot the F even existed, thanks for clarifying that.

ehparis · Sep 15, 2007

Roger Hicks said:
Eh? A camera with no flaws? Even my MP isn't perfect, but I'd much rather use it than an F3.

I love my F3HP. What's an MP?

mawz · Sep 18, 2007

Sparky said:
For my money - the F3HP HAD no flaws. I had no problems or issues with mine at any time. I loved it - and it was, by a LONG shot, the best 35mm I'd ever used. If only people actually USED their cameras more, and stopped just sittin' on their duffs looking at them...! (that wasn't a personal jab - just in case it be taken that way)

Try night shooting with it and reading exposure off that horrid LCD. I owned the F3HP and F2A side by side for months, and the F3 never got used. The better finder in the F2 (I don't wear glasses, and the HP finder in the F3 is only better for glasses wearers) and the better metering readout made a huge difference for me.

The F3 certainly has its flaws. The meter LCD and its (almost never working) backlight are by far the worst of them.

snegron · Sep 18, 2007

mawz said:
Try night shooting with it and reading exposure off that horrid LCD. I owned the F3HP and F2A side by side for months, and the F3 never got used. The better finder in the F2 (I don't wear glasses, and the HP finder in the F3 is only better for glasses wearers) and the better metering readout made a huge difference for me.

The F3 certainly has its flaws. The meter LCD and its (almost never working) backlight are by far the worst of them.

Interesting similarity in my case; I have an F2A and a couple of F3HP's, all in working condition. I hardly ever use the F2A because it doesn't feel well balnced (rather top-heavy in my opinion). Also, I find that my F2A is a bit too rounded or smooth on the edges making it slip from my hand much easier than an F3. I actually use my older F much more than my F2A (my F with Ftn metered prism is even more top-heavy than my F2A, but due to its sharper edges it sits better in my hands). I think I have used my F2A twice in the past year, whereas I always carry my F3HP and Nikon F with me all the time.

As far as reading the meter in the F3HP, it's a matter of getting used to it. I'll take an LCD over an LED any day (bad experiences with an FM2). It becomes second nature after a while. I do agree though that the tiny backlight is useless. Another slight drawback (or weak spot) that the Nikon F3 has is in the shutter release button being located on the film advance lever. I believe that this design is not as reliable as other Nikons (such as the F, F2, FM2, etc.) that have the shutter release button not attatched to the film advance lever.

This past weekend I took one of my F3HP's to Disney's Magic Kingdom in Orlando, Florida. For the sake of traveling lite I removed the MD4 motor drive and just took a couple of prime lenses. The F3HP with a 35mm AIS 2.0 is a very light weight combo. After walking around under the sun for about 7 hours, standing in long lines, getting into and out of rides, the F3 did not feel as heavy as other cameras I have used under the same circumstances. My only regret was that my shoulder strap was too wide (great when used with the F3, MD4, and large lens), so it kept slipping from my shoulder.

newsphotog · Sep 19, 2007

dslater said:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that the F3 used some of the first generation LCD's. At the time, there probably wasn't anything better.

Exactly. Remember, the camera was introduced in 1980.

John Koehrer · Sep 19, 2007

ehparis said:
I love my F3HP. What's an MP?

Leica

mawz · Sep 20, 2007

snegron said:
Interesting similarity in my case; I have an F2A and a couple of F3HP's, all in working condition. I hardly ever use the F2A because it doesn't feel well balnced (rather top-heavy in my opinion). Also, I find that my F2A is a bit too rounded or smooth on the edges making it slip from my hand much easier than an F3. I actually use my older F much more than my F2A (my F with Ftn metered prism is even more top-heavy than my F2A, but due to its sharper edges it sits better in my hands). I think I have used my F2A twice in the past year, whereas I always carry my F3HP and Nikon F with me all the time.

I never noticed a huge difference in balance between the two, although the F2 is a bit more top-heavy. As to the F, I find it uncomfortable due to the bad shutter release placement.

snegron said:
As far as reading the meter in the F3HP, it's a matter of getting used to it. I'll take an LCD over an LED any day (bad experiences with an FM2). It becomes second nature after a while. I do agree though that the tiny backlight is useless. Another slight drawback (or weak spot) that the Nikon F3 has is in the shutter release button being located on the film advance lever. I believe that this design is not as reliable as other Nikons (such as the F, F2, FM2, etc.) that have the shutter release button not attatched to the film advance lever.

My first real MF Nikon was an FA and I had the F3 for 18 months before getting the F2A. I truly came to loathe that awful LCD in that time. While the newer LCD and LCD-style LED displays on the AF Nikons are quite usable (and well backlit) the simple LCD on these two bodies is the worst display I've had the mispleasure to use, especially in low light where they become unreadable long before a needle or LED readout. I greatly prefer LED's, especially a 5 LED setup, or match needle, or plain needle (a la DP-11 on an F2). The best meter readout I've seen for older SLR's is the Pentax LX's Match LED readout. The best metering readout I've ever seen is the EOS 3/1v dual simulated match needle (2 side by side readouts so you could see exposure compensation, multi-spot metering and other compared readings. Sounds complicated, works extremely well)

snegron said:
This past weekend I took one of my F3HP's to Disney's Magic Kingdom in Orlando, Florida. For the sake of traveling lite I removed the MD4 motor drive and just took a couple of prime lenses. The F3HP with a 35mm AIS 2.0 is a very light weight combo. After walking around under the sun for about 7 hours, standing in long lines, getting into and out of rides, the F3 did not feel as heavy as other cameras I have used under the same circumstances. My only regret was that my shoulder strap was too wide (great when used with the F3, MD4, and large lens), so it kept slipping from my shoulder.

roteague · Sep 20, 2007

mawz said:
I truly came to loathe that awful LCD in that time. While the newer LCD and LCD-style LED displays on the AF Nikons are quite usable (and well backlit)

That's funny, I never noticed the LCD in all the years I used my F3 - probably more than a dozen - oh, I knew it was there, I didn't see any problems with it.

fotch · Sep 20, 2007

I like the 100% viewfinders the best (F3, F2). Use in low light, not a problem for me. I have a F3 & F3HP, FA,EL, F2, FE, and others. Funny, never notice having any problems with the viewfinders. Like the F3's the best. To each their own.

spiralcity · Sep 22, 2007

I just came across this thread and it prompted me to pull out my F3HP. I always knew you had full view so i guess i didnt pay much attention to the change from my FE2 or other Nikons to the F3HP. I see what your saying but it dosent come acrross as unusual to me.

snegron · Sep 22, 2007

spiralcity said:
I just came across this thread and it prompted me to pull out my F3HP. I always knew you had full view so i guess i didnt pay much attention to the change from my FE2 or other Nikons to the F3HP. I see what your saying but it dosent come acrross as unusual to me.

I think that where it gets a bit tricky is when you use a wide angle or fisheye lens. Things will appear farther than they actually are even more so. By appearing even farther, will lines appear even more distorted through the viewfinder of an F3HP than they would through the viewfinder of another Nikon mounted with the same wide angle or fisheye lens? It doesn't make much of a difference on film, but I find the effect quite curious.

fotch · Sep 22, 2007

snegron said:
I think that where it gets a bit tricky is when you use a wide angle or fisheye lens. Things will appear farther than they actually are even more so. By appearing even farther, will lines appear even more distorted through the viewfinder of an F3HP than they would through the viewfinder of another Nikon mounted with the same wide angle or fisheye lens? It doesn't make much of a difference on film, but I find the effect quite curious.

Emmm, I have two Nikon Fisheyes, The older one (7.5mm) is used only on't n cameras that you can lock up the mirror (F3, F2, EL) and you use a aux. finder. So, no disagreement here.

The other is a newer Nikon 16mm. I use this with both the F3, F3HP, FE, and didn't notice any difference other than the FE only shows 90% view. I will check all again and see if there is a difference.

fschifano · Sep 25, 2007

snegron said:
I think that where it gets a bit tricky is when you use a wide angle or fisheye lens. Things will appear farther than they actually are even more so. By appearing even farther, will lines appear even more distorted through the viewfinder of an F3HP than they would through the viewfinder of another Nikon mounted with the same wide angle or fisheye lens? It doesn't make much of a difference on film, but I find the effect quite curious.

Well the truth is that it doesn't make ANY difference on film. The viewfinder looks different because it is different. Of all the Nikon SLR's in my collection, the F3HP has the best finder for my far sighted eyes. With the proper correction eyepiece, I can see all the way out to the corners with my glasses. So yes, when a wide angle lens is mounted, I do notice more distortion near the edges of the frame simply because it's readily visible and there's more of it to see.

F3HP Viewfinders vs. Other Nikons

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency